James Vs. State of
Kerala  INSC 694 (31 August 2010)
Reportable IN THE
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.7207 OF
2010 [Arising out of SLP [C] No.352 of 2008] James Joseph ... Appellant State
of Kerala ... Respondent
appeal relates to the scope of an appeal against an appellate order under
section 12A of the Kerala Forest Act, 1961 (`Act' for short). The State
Government issued a notification under section 4 of the Travancore Forest
Regulation II of 1068 ME proposing to declare certain lands including the
disputed lands as revenue forest. The appellant's predecessor in title filed a
written statement before the Forest Settlement Officer under section 6 of the
Act in (claim case No.2/1955) claiming title to the disputed lands, which 2
formed part of the proposed reserve forest. The Forest Settlement Officer by
common order dated 14.11.1969 rejected his claim inter alia holding that the
notified areas were lands at the disposal of the government and the government
was entitled to constitute the same as a reserve forest. Feeling aggrieved the
appellant's predecessor filed an appeal against the order of the Forest
Settlement Officer under section 11 of the Act. The appeal was allowed by the
first Additional District Judge, Ernakulam by common judgment dated 23.6.1980
holding that the Royal Neet of 1928 ME to which the appellant traced back his
title was a genuine document and the notification issued by the Government in
respect of the proposed reserve forest was without jurisdiction.
State Government filed an appeal against the said appellate judgment before the
High Court under section 12A of the Act. (MSA No.1/1981). The High Court
allowed the second appeal and reversed the judgment of the District Judge. The
order of the High Court was challenged by the appellant. This Court by order
dated 25.11.2003 allowed the civil appeal filed by the appellant and remanded
the matter to the High Court for fresh consideration, with the following
3 "... some
decisions have also been referred, to that the jurisdiction under Section 12A
of the Act is akin to Section 100 C.P.C. We feel that since the matter is fit
to be remanded for fresh decision this question as raised may also be better
canvassed before the High Court for its consideration."
the matter was pending before the High Court on remand, the appellant (who is
the 33rd respondent in the said appeal) filed an application (IA No.955/2005)
praying that the High Court be pleased to formulate the substantial questions of
law before proceeding with the hearing of appeal.
He contended that the
appeal under section 12A was a second appeal; that a second appeal was
available only if the case involved any substantial question of law and was
governed by the provisions of section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure
(`Code' for short); and that the High Court should therefore, before hearing
the second appeal, formulate the questions of law involved in the appeal. The
High Court by the impugned order dated 23.3.2007 dismissed the said
application. The High court held that section 12A of the Act did not provide
for a "second appeal", but only provides for an appeal against an
appellate order and therefore the question of importing the requirements of
section 100 of the Code into such an appeal did not arise; that the intention
of the legislature in enacting section 12A of the Act, granting a right of
appeal against an order passed by the District Court under section 11 of the
Act, was not limited to substantial questions of law; and 4 therefore the
question of formulating any substantial questions of law before hearing the
appeal did not arise.
said order of the High Court is challenged in this appeal by special leave. The
appellant contends that an appeal under section 12A of the Act is a `second
appeal'; that a second appeal is available only in regard to questions of law
and not in regard to any question of fact; that whenever there is a second
appeal from a District Court/Civil Court to the High Court, such second appeal
will be governed by section 100 of the Code and it will be maintainable only if
it involves a substantial question of law; and that where the High Court is
satisfied that the second appeal involves any substantial questions of law, it
should formulate the said questions of law.
the contentions raised, the questions that therefore arise for our
consideration in this appeal are :
(i) Whether an appeal
under section 12A of the Kerala Forest Act, 1961 against an appellate order
under section 11 of the said Act, would lie only if it involves a substantial
question of law? 5 (ii) If so, whether the Memorandum of appeal shall have to
state the substantial question of law involved in the appeal and whether the
High Court is bound to formulate the substantial question/s of law, while
admitting the appeal or before posting the appeal for hearing.
The relevant legal
answers to the questions raised depend upon the scheme of chapter II of the Act
relating to Reserved forests. The relevant portions of Sections 4, 5, 6, 8, 9,
11, 12A and 83 of the Act are extracted below :
by Government.- Whenever it is proposed to constitute any land a Reserved
Forest, the Government shall publish a notification in the Gazette- x x x [c]
appointing an officer (hereinafter called the Forest Settlement Officer) to
inquire into and determined the existence, nature and extent of any rights
claimed, by or alleged to exist in favour of any person in or over any land comprised
within such limits, or to any forest produce of such land and to deal with the
same as provided in this Act."
barred.- Except as hereinafter provided, no Civil court shall between the dates
of publication of the notification under section 4, and of the notification to
be issued under section 19, entertain any suit against the Government to
establish any right in or over any land, or to the forest produce of any land,
included in the notification published under section 4."
by Forest Settlement Officer.- (1) When a notification has been issued under
section 4, the Forest Settlement Officer shall publish in the Gazette and at
the headquarters of each Taluk in which any portion of the land included in
such notification is situate, and in every town, village and headquarters of
Panchayats in the neighbourhood of such land a proclamation.
6 (a) specifying, as
nearly as possible, the situation and limits of the land proposed to be
included within the Reserved Forest.
(b) setting forth the
substance of the provisions of section 7, (c) explaining the consequences which
as hereinafter provided will ensure on the reservation of such forest, and (d)
fixing a period of not less than three and not exceeding six months from the
date of publishing such proclamation in the gazette, and requiring every person
claiming and right referred to in section 4 either to present to such Officer,
within such period, a written statement specifying or to appear before him
within such period and state, the nature of such right and in either case, to
produce, all documents and other evidence in support thereof.
(2) The Forest
Settlement Officer shall also serve a notice to the same effect on every known
or reputed owner or occupier of any land included in or adjoining the land
proposed to be constituted a Reserved Forest or on his recognized agent or
manager. Such notice may be sent by registered post."
"8. Inquiry by
Forest Settlement Officer.- (1) The Forest Settlement Officer shall inquire
into all claims made under section 6 recording all statements and the evidence
in the manner prescribed by the Code of Civil Procedure for appealable cases.
(2) He shall, at the
same time, consider and record any objection which the Forest Officer, if any,
appointed under section 4 to attend at the inquiry on behalf of the Government,
may make to any such claim.
(3) He may also
inquire into and record the existence of any rights referred to in section 4
and not claimed in answer to the notice issued under section 6, so far as they
are ascertainable from the records of the Government and the evidence of any
person likely to be acquainted with the same.
9. Powers of Forest
Settlement Officer.- For the purpose of such inquiry, the Forest Settlement
Officer may exercise the following powers, namely:- 7 (a) the power to enter
by himself or to authorize any officer to enter upon and land, and to survey,
demarcate and make a map of the same; and (b) the powers of a Civil Court in
the trial of suits."
from the Orders of Settlement Officer.- (1) Where a claim is rejected wholly or
in part, the claimant may, within ninety days from the date of the order prefer
an appeal to the District Court in respect of such rejection only. The time
taken for obtaining copies of the order appealed against shall be excluded in
computing the period of ninety days.
(2) Whenever a claim
is admitted in the first instance wholly or in part, a like appeal may be
preferred on behalf of Government by the Forest Officer appointed under section
4, or other person generally or specially empowered by the Government in this
"12A. Appeal to
the High Court.- (1) The Government or any person objecting to any order of the
District Court in an appeal under section 11 may, within a period of ninety
days from the date of that order, appeal against such order to the High Court:
83. Decision or order
of Forest Settlement Officer to have the effect of District Court decrees.- Any
decision or order passed by a Forest settlement Officer under this Act and any
order passed in appeal there from shall be enforceable by the District Court
within whose jurisdiction the land is situated as if it were a decree passed by
such District Court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
following hierarchical structure in regard to appeals emerges from the
provisions of the Act :
(a) The claims to any
land proposed to be included in the reserved forest under the Act, are inquired
into and determined by the Forest Settlement Officer;
8 (b) If the claims
are rejected an appeal lies to District Court at the instance of the claimant
and if the claim is admitted, an appeal lies to the District Court at the
instance of the State Government.
(c) Either the State
Government or any person objecting to any order of the District Court in an
appeal under section 11 of the Act can file an appeal against the appellant
order, to the High Court.
12A does not use the words "second appeal". It provides that an
appeal would lie against an appellate order under section 11 to the High Court.
The word `appeal' is not defined either under the Act or under the Code.
Black's Law dictionary, (7th edn.) defines an appeal as "a proceeding
undertaken to have a decision reconsidered by bringing it to a higher
classic definition of an appeal in Chappan v. Moidin Kutti [ ILR (1899) 22
Madras 68], by a Full Bench of the Madras High Court, adopted by this Court, in
Tirupati Balaji Developers (P) Ltd. v. State of Bihar [2004 (5) SCC 1], is as
in its natural and ordinary meaning the removal of a cause from any inferior
court or tribunal to a superior one for the purpose of testing the soundness of
decision and proceedings of the inferior court or tribunal. The superior forum
shall have jurisdiction to reverse, confirm, annul or modify the decree or
order of the forum appealed against and in the event of a remand the lower
forum shall have to rehear the matter and 9 comply with such directions as may
accompany the order of remand. The appellate jurisdiction inherently carries
with it a power to issue corrective directions binding on the forum below. ...
An appeal is a process of civil law origin and removes a cause, entirely
subjecting the facts as well as the law, to a review and a retrial."
Hari Shankar v. Rao Girdhari Lal Chowdhury [1962 Supp. (1) SCR 933], this court
"A right of
appeal carries with it a right of rehearing on law as well as fact, unless the
statute conferring the right of appeal limits the rehearing in some way as, we
find, has been done in second appeals arising under the Code of Civil
Shankar Ramchandra Abhyankar v. Krishnaji Dattatreya Bapat [1969 (2) SCC 74],
this court referred to the statement in Story on Constitution (of United
States), Vol. 2, Article 1761 that the essential criterion of appellate
jurisdiction is that it revises and corrects the proceedings in a cause already
instituted and does not create that cause. The appellate jurisdiction may be
exercised in a variety of forms and, indeed, in any form in which the
Legislature may choose to prescribe. An appeal is a process of civil law origin
and removes a cause, entirely subjecting the fact as well as the law to a
review and a retrial.
Sri Raja Lakshmi Dyeing Works v. Rangaswamy Chettiar [AIR 1980 SC 1253], this
court held :
appellate jurisdiction involves a rehearing, as it were, on law as well as fact
and is invoked by an aggrieved person. Such jurisdiction may, however, be
limited in some way as, for instance has been done in the case of second appeal
under the Code of Civil Procedure, and under some Rent Acts in some
This Court thereafter
proceeded to explain the scope of revisional jurisdictional and then concluded
that the question of the extent of appellate or revisional jurisdiction has to
be considered in each case with reference to the language employed by the
100 of the Code is a classic example of limiting the jurisdiction in an appeal.
It specifically provides that the second appeal will be available only where
there exists substantial question of law. Some enactments do not specify that
the second appeal will be restricted to substantial questions of law, but
incorporate section 100 of the Code by reference, in regard to appeals from
appellate orders. Section 18(1) of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India
Act, 1997 is an example :
"18. Appeal to
Supreme Court - (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) or in any other law, an appeal shall lie against
any order, not being an interlocutory order, 1 of the Appellate Tribunal to
the Supreme Court on one or more of the grounds specified in section 100 of
Some other statutes
have provisions in regard to appeals from appellate orders placing specific
limitations on the extent and scope of the appellate jurisdiction by providing
that a second appeal will lie only if it involves substantial questions of law
or questions of law, without reference to section 100 of the Code. We may by
way of illustration, refer to the following :
Section 260A of
Income Tax Act, 1961.
"Appeal to High
260A. (1) An appeal
shall lie to the High Court from every order passed in appeal by the Appellate
Tribunal, if the High Court is satisfied that the case involves a substantial
question of law.
(2) The Chief
Commissioner or the Commissioner or an assessee aggrieved by any order passed
by the Appellate Tribunal may file an appeal to the High Court and such appeal
under this sub-section shall be - (a) filed within one hundred and twenty days
from the date on which the order appealed against is received by the assessee
or the Chief Commissioner or Commissioner;
(b) [omitted] (c) in
the form of a memorandum of appeal precisely stating therein the substantial
question of law involved.
(3) Where the High
Court is satisfied that a substantial question of law is involved in any case,
it shall formulate that question.
(4) The appeal shall
be heard only on the question so formulated, and the respondents shall at the
hearing of the appeal, be allowed to argue that the case does not involve such
Provided that nothing
in this sub-section shall be deemed to take away or abridge the power of the
Court to hear, for reasons to be recorded, the 1 appeal on any other
substantial question of law not formulated by it, if it is satisfied that the
case involves such question.
(5) The High Court
shall decide the question of law so formulated and deliver such judgment
thereon containing the grounds on which such decision is founded and may award
such cost as it deems fit.
(6) The High Court
may determine any issue which - (a) has not been determined by the Appellate
Tribunal; or (b) has been wrongly determined by the Appellate Tribunal, by
reason of a decision on such question of law as is referred to in sub-section
(7) Save as otherwise
provided in this Act, the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of
1908) relating to appeals to the High Court shall, as far as may be, apply in
the case of appeals under this section.
Section 15Z of the Securities
and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 15Z. Appeal to Supreme Court.- Any person
aggrieved by any decision or order of the Securities Appellate Tribunal may
file an appeal to the Supreme Court within sixty days from the date of
communication of the decision or order of the Securities Appellate Tribunal to
him on any question of law arising out of such order .........."
enactments impliedly incorporate the provisions of section 100 of the Code. In
Chunilal Vithal Das vs. Mohanlal Motilal Patel - (1966) Supp SCR 180, this
court dealt with such a provision contained in section 28(1) of the Saurashtra
Rent Control Act, 1951, extracted below :
anything contained in any law, but subject to the provisions of the Provincial
Small Cause Court Act, as adapted and applied to the State of Saurashtra, an
appeal shall lie from a decree or order made by a Civil Judge or a Munsiff
exercising jurisdiction under section 27 to the District Court and a second
appeal to the High Court."
1 It was contended
by the appellant-tenant therein that an appellate court is competent to examine
the correctness of the decision appealed from on the ground that the decision
is erroneous in point of law or fact, and in the absence of any express
provision to the contrary, restrictions imposed on the power of the High Court
under one statute cannot be imported merely because of similarity of
nomenclature, when exercising jurisdiction under another statute unless those
restrictions are imposed by express enactment or necessary intendment. It was
further contended that as no restriction was imposed upon the power of second
appeal under section 28 of the Rent Act, the High Court was competent and
indeed bound to entertain all objections to the correctness of the judgment
including those relating to questions of fact. This court negatived the said
contention. This court held that a second appeal under section 28 of the
Saurashtra Act can be entertained by a High Court within the limits prescribed
by section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure and it is not open to the parties
to demand re-appraisal of the evidence by the High Court. This Court held that
the scheme of Saurashtra Act did not confer any special jurisdiction upon the
courts described therein, but it only intended to provide for a second appeal
in terms of section 100 of the Code. This Court held that the Saurashtra Act
merely declared that a second appeal will lie to the High Court against decrees
or orders passed by 1 the courts exercising jurisdiction under section 27, but
thereby the essential character of a second appeal under the Code was not
altered and the procedure in the trial of suit, applications and proceedings
under the Act, was the procedure prescribed by the Code of Civil Procedure and
therefore it had to be held that the legislature intended to confer a right of
second appeal subject to the restrictions imposed by section 100 of the Code.
may therefore formulate the following principles with reference to appeals :
(i) An appeal is a
proceeding where an higher forum reconsiders the decision of a lower forum, on
questions of fact and questions of law, with jurisdiction to confirm, reverse,
modify the decision or remand the matter to the lower forum for fresh decision
in terms of its directions.
(ii) The appellate
jurisdiction can be limited or regulated by the legislature and its extent has
to be decided with reference to the language employed by the statute conferring
the appellate jurisdiction.
(iii) The width of
jurisdiction or the limitations on jurisdiction with reference to an appeal,
does not depend on whether the appeal is a first appeal or a second appeal, but
depends upon the limitations, if any, placed by the statute conferring the
right of appeal.
1 (iv) If the
Legislature's intention is to limit the jurisdiction in an appeal, it may
indicate such limits in the provision providing for appeal. Alternatively, it
may expressly or impliedly incorporate the provisions of section 100 of the
Code, into the provision for appeals.
statutory provisions for appeals against original orders or decrees (that is,
first appeals) will not have any limitations and therefore rehearing on both
law and fact is contemplated; and statutory provisions for appeals against
appellate orders (that is, second appeals) will be restricted to questions of
law. But such restriction is not on account of any legal principle that all
second appeals should always be with reference to questions of law, but would
depend upon the wording of the statute placing the restrictions upon the scope
of second appeal.
(vi) Where the
statute does not place any limitations or restrictions in regard to the scope
and width of the appeal, it shall be construed that the appeal provides a right
of rehearing on law as well as facts. If the Legislature enacts a self
contained provision for second appeals, without any limitation upon the scope
of the second appeal and excludes the possibility of reading the provision of
section 100 of the Code, into such provision, then, it will not be permissible
to read the limitations of section 100 of the Code into the special provision.
may now examine the scope of section 12A of the Act with reference to the above
principles. For convenience we have juxtaposition 1 section 100 of the Code
with section 12A of the Act, to ascertain the scope of section 12A of the Act.
Section 12A of the
Act. "Appeal to the High Section 100 of the Code - "Second appeal".
Court".- -- (1)
The Government or any person objecting to (1) Save as otherwise expressly
provided in the any order of the District Court in an appeal body of this Code
or by any other law for the under section 11 may, within a period of ninety
time being in force, an appeal shall lie to the days from the date of that
order, appeal against High Court from every decree passed in appeal such order
to the High Court: by any Court subordinate to the High Court, if Provided that
High Court may admit an appeal the High Court is satisfied that the case
preferred after the expiration of the period of involves a substantial question
ninety days aforesaid
if it is satisfied that the appellant had sufficient cause for not preferring
the appeal within the said period.
(2) An appeal may lie
under this section from ------ an appellate decree passed ex parte.
(2) An appeal under
sub-section (1) shall be in (3) In an appeal under this section, the prescribed
form and shall be verified in the memorandum of appeal shall precisely state
the prescribed manner and shall be accompanied substantial question of law
involved in the by a fee of one hundred rupees. appeal.
(3) On receipt of an
appeal under sub-section (4) Where the High Court is satisfied that a (1), the
High Court may, after giving the substantial question of law is involved in any
parties a reasonable opportunity of being heard, case, it shall formulate that
either in person or
by a representative:- (5) The appeal shall be heard on the question so (a)
confirm or cancel the order of the District formulated and the respondent
shall, at the Court appealed against; or hearing of the appeal, be allowed to
argue that the case does not involve such question:
(b) set aside such
order and remand the case to the District Court for decision after such further
Provided that nothing in this sub-section enquiry as may be directed; or shall
be deemed to take away or abridge the power of the Court to hear, for reasons
to be (c) pass such other orders as it may think fit. recorded, the appeal on
any other substantial question of law, not formulated by it, if it is satisfied
that the case involves such question.
(4) Every order
passed in appeal under this section shall be final. ----- (5) Any order passed
by the High Court under this section shall be enforceable by the District Court
within whose jurisdiction the land is situated, as if it were a decree passed by
such ----- District Court under the Code of Civil 1 Procedure, 1908 (Central
Act 5 of 1908.) The form of memorandum of Appeal referred to in section 12A(2)
of the Act is prescribed by the Kerala Forest (Appeal to the High Court) Rules
The said form is
extracted below :
"Form Of Appeal
[See Rule 2] (1) Name or names (with full address/addresses of the
(2) Name or names
(with full address/addresses) of the person/persons who shall be impleaded or
brought on record as respondent/respondents.
(3) Statement of
(4) Grounds of
Appellant(s)/Counsel for Appellant The facts stated above are true to the best
of my knowledge and belief.
Appellant(s)/Counsel for Appellant
following differences in the two provisions demonstrate that section 12A of the
Act is intended to be self contained in so far as appeals 1 under the Act to
the High Court, deliberately deviating from the provisions of section 100 of
the Code :
(i) Sub-sections (1),
(3) and (4) of section 100 of the Code provide specifically that the second
appeal would lie only where substantial questions of law are involved. On the
other hand, sub-section (1) of section 12A provides for an appeal against the
order of the appellate authority under section 11 of the Act would lie, without
specifying any limitation or restriction.
(ii) Section 100 of
the Code begins with the words "Save as otherwise expressly provided ...
by any other law". This means that a second appeal can be to a court or
Tribunal other than the High Court, or that second appeal need not be
restricted to substantial questions of law, if so provided by other law.
Section 12A of the Act is one such provision of other law, expressly providing
(iii) Where the Act
wants to adopt the provisions of the Code, it expressly provided so. For
example, sub-section (5) of section 12A and section 83 expressly refer to and
make applicable the provisions of the Code in other 1 contexts. But when it
comes appeals to High Court, section 12A of the Act deliberately chalks a
different path from section 100 of the Code.
sub-section (3) of section 100 of the Code requires the appellant to precisely
state the substantial question of law in the memorandum of appeal, sub-section
(2) of section 12A of the Act read with Rule 2(1) and the form of appeal under
the Kerala Forest (Appeal to the High Court) Rules 1981, does not require the
appeal memorandum to state any questions of law, substantial or otherwise. The
provisions of sub-section (3) of section 12A also clearly reiterates by
implication that the jurisdiction of the High Court under section 12A is not
subject to any limitations.
view of the above, the High Court was right in holding that the appeal under
section 12A of the Act is available both in respect of questions of fact and
questions of law. Therefore there is no need for the High Court to frame any
substantial question of law. The appeal is dismissed as having no merit.
(R V Raveendran)